Introducing
April
PRIDE UNCHECKED CAN PRODUCE PROBLEMS ON A MASSIVE SCALE The Spirit of God in wielding the sword of the Word does not hold back in language and example regarding the danger of possessing and displaying a haughty spirit, a proud heart, and an arrogant attitude towards others, which is really nothing less than an affront to our Creator who has made us all equal. Pride results in eventual embarrassment of self, total humiliation, contentiousness with our fellow-human beings, and at the end can result in unmitigated personal disaster (Prov. 11:2; 13:10; 16:18). Haman, the manipulative oppressor of all those who belonged to and acknowledged the God of Israel, is a glaring example of what not to be, and what not to do. He was quite simply absolutely full of himself, preoccupied only with the promotion and advancement of number one. He just could not accommodate anyone else in his thinking; he was saying, in other words, ‘Who else but me can be in the mind of royalty as far as all-important
court matters are concerned?’ How wrong he was! Tables can be very easily and quickly turned in the vicissitudes of life. Instead of the expected elevation to the highest echelons of power in the land, Haman found himself in the depths of despair and in peril of his life. Even his most cherished possession, his wife we presume, who was a willing co-conspirator in his evil schemes, realised right away that the game was up (6:12-13). There was no shelter from the gathering storm that would eventually engulf the whole family. The Lord is not fooled. Evil men and women, dupes of the Devil, can never ultimately succeed and prosper in their destructive intentions. They will be brought up short and exposed for what they are, viz. mere puppets of a deviously clever and malicious adversary of God and every human being. R.B.F.
46
From Study Groups HAMAN’S PRIDE, ESTHER’S REQUEST, AND THE FIRST RELIEF (Esther 5-6) From Aberkenfig: Genesis 1 tells us that on the third day God made the ground fruitful, the land bringing forth every green plant and fruiting trees. Genesis 22 reveals that it was on the third day that Abraham saw the place God had chosen for Isaac to be offered. On Moriah he learned the wonder of God’s providing, a substitute being found for his son. Now Esther comes to the third day of her fasting [as with all her people, the Jews, too who were in the capital—R.B.F.] and she knows that she has to approach the king on behalf of her people. She was to know the wonder of God’s providing, and through it to experience that fruitfulness known by those who fear God as they rest entirely upon Him. Her anxieties evaporated as the king extended the golden sceptre and she was able to activate her plan to bring Haman to judgement. What a scene is exhibited here—the king, exalted, powerful and having a great joy in his chosen queen; Haman, riddled with pride and malice, ignorant of Esther’s nationality and therefore unaware that her life was in jeopardy; Esther, full of concern for her people, yet honouring the king. She restrained any thought of revenge on her enemy, rather inviting him to share in this intimate meal with the king. Perhaps we see something here of Romans 12:19-21: ‘Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”’ To the contrary, ‘... “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head”’ (ESV) [Comment 1]. Haman’s joy and pride knew no bounds. Mordecai was the only blot in his life, and as he boasts of his wealth, status and family, he is encouraged to vent his spite on Mordecai as soon as possible. How much of the Adversary’s activity we see at the cross of Calvary! The Jewish leaders were given the opportunity to punish Jesus themselves, but they were determined to use the ‘Gentile’ instrument of death (John 18:31-32; 19:6-11) and the Devil egged them on in his hatred of the one who was his God and Maker. Mordecai’s deliverance began with the remembrance of his actions in protecting the king. Haman was so self-centred that he assumed great things for himself. The
47
king, however, now had a faithful servant in view for honour, and Haman was forced to humble himself to do the king’s bidding. The Lord Jesus always did His Father’s will, never compromised His laws and was destined for glory, even though the path led via the cross (Heb. 2:9). In many ways Mordecai’s death sentence also brought Haman to defeat. We know that Jesus’ death, and His resurrection three days later, brought the Devil to nought (Heb. 2:14-15), thus God was providing deliverance, and once again the third day was revealing God’s power and grace. Edwin Stanley From Cromer: What a contrast we see when we compare the lives and aspirations of Haman and Mordecai! We have seen that Mordecai’s life was centred on God and His purposes for His people [Comment 2]. Haman’s life was governed by a desire for wealth, power and self-importance. In Paul’s second letter to Timothy he looks ahead to a time when ‘People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, … ungrateful, unholy, … unforgiving, … brutal, … conceited …’ (2 Tim. 3:2-4 NIV). But these were traits that were prevalent in men and women in Esther’s time and were shown in Haman’s life. Such tendencies should be guarded against in a Christian’s life because, as we see in what followed with Haman, they can affect not only one’s own life but also the lives of others. Initially Haman withheld his anger at Mordecai’s disregard for his position but did not forget, and so he incited his wife and friends to share in his anger and desire for revenge. How easy it is for us to dwell on perceived wrongs to us and try to get others to ‘side’ with us instead of talking with the person concerned to sort it out. There is also a lesson for us in the attitudes of Zeresh and Haman’s friends. They no doubt considered it an honour to be associated with a person of such high rank as Haman and were quick and eager to join in planning his revenge without considering the Jewish descent of Mordecai. Chapter 6 verse 13 shows that they were forced to recognize the power of the God of the Jewish people. Haman’s disregard of this power led to his destruction [Comment 3]. In a world where we see the admiration of men with power and wealth, let us not forget the all-conquering power of God and, like Mordecai, centre our life on the will of God and His path laid out for us. David Hickling
48
From Derby: How disciples deal with annoyance This refers to disciples in general, not just in any particular denomination. Sometimes God may ask us to do something with someone we may dislike, and realising that if God is favouring that person, then we must not let anger simmer in the background, but we must deal with it prayerfully before the Lord. What we must not rely on is our own selfworth, since that may be misguided. As Christians we are delighted that we are saved and going to our eternal home in heaven above; but this is only because of the favour God has shown to us through Jesus Christ. Therefore we must not let our feelings of anger remain, meanwhile doing our best to forgive and forget. The wrath within Haman was put into action to exterminate Mordecai and his people. This is what happened to the Lord: the people who should have known better wanted to do away with Him. When Haman entered into the king’s presence full of himself and the king asked what was to be done with the man whom he delighted to honour, Haman thought that this was himself. The king, however, discovered that Mordecai had saved him from an assassination attempt. Therefore, he asked Haman to honour Mordecai, which was in direct opposition to what Haman was thinking. Haman’s wife soon recognised that he could not stand before Mordecai and she seemed to realise that God was on the side of the Jews [see Comment 3]. Had the plot been allowed to proceed all Jews everywhere would have been exterminated—in the king’s country, in the remote provinces and even where the remnant were gathered in Jerusalem. The Persian empire was in total control over Judah and Israel. This was something that God would not have allowed to take place as it would have destroyed the royal line from which Jesus was going to come [Comment 4]. Esther was now prepared to perish and take the risk for doing what was right for God’s people. She planned her strategy carefully in accordance with the king’s rules. Esther was wise in the way she approached the powerful monarch. We are here shown that people who work for God in the background without being noticed by others shall be honoured by God in a coming day. Robert Foster From Greenock: Haman's pride Pride and rebellion against God caused Satan to be cast out of heaven (Is. 14:12-15; Ezek. 28:3-19). Pride is totally alien to God's character. He said, ‘These are the ones I look on with favour: those who are humble and contrite in spirit, and who tremble at my word’ (Is. 66:2); and His requirement is ‘To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God’ (Mic. 6:8).
49
Haman's name means ‘well-disposed’ but his character was the antithesis of a humble man. He seems not to have had one redeeming virtue. He was proud, boastful, jealous, vindictive, violent, and cruel in the way that he dealt with people he didn't like. It appears as if he was a tool of the Devil to want to destroy not only his perceived enemy, Mordecai, but also the whole of the Jewish people in the Persian empire. There was something mentally wrong with Haman that would explain his actions, but underneath the pride and bluster of Haman’s public persona, there was a weak, insecure and troubled man. To what depths of degradation and self loathing he sank as he conferred on Mordecai the king's honours that had been almost within his grasp. It was another abasement which sealed his fate when he had to grovel before the Jewish Queen Esther, whose people he sought to destroy. He was a coward who would kill thousands of people, yet pleaded for his own life when confronted with death. The gallows that Haman had built for Mordecai would be where his own worthless life would end. King David's words are apposite: ‘Whoever digs a hole and scoops it out falls into the pit they have made. The trouble they cause recoils on them; their violence comes down on their own heads’ (Ps. 7:15-16). There have been many tyrants throughout history who have tried to destroy the Jewish people, and there will be many more modern Hamans with one common aim, to destroy God’s ancient people as the time draws near for Israel to go though the time of Jacob’s trouble (Jer. 30:7); but they will be no more successful than Haman, the descendant of Agag, the descendant of Amalek. ‘No weapon forged against you (Israel) will prevail’ (Is. 54:17). John Peddie From Halifax: Pride, then humiliation The Jews of Shushan joined with Esther and her maidens in her fast (Esth. 4:16). The obvious but unstated object of this fast was nothing less than the obtaining of God’s favour, and protection for Esther in her perilous undertaking. On the third day of the fast Esther, without invitation, bravely presented herself in royal apparel at the inner court of the king’s house (5:1). Haman’s command for the annihilation of the Jewish people had been written and sealed with the king’s ring on the thirteenth day of the first month (3:12)—the day before Passover. Therefore Esther’s fast would have occurred during the time of the feast of unleavened bread. Her life being now in the hands of the king, Esther may have reflected on her own words (4:16), ‘… if I perish, I perish.’ What a relief though, as she was permitted to draw near and touch the golden sceptre extended to her!
50
Haman summoned his friends and Zeresh his wife. He recounted to them in boastfulness his wealth, his family and his promotion (5:11). Indeed, ‘Esther the queen’, he said, ‘did let no man come in with the king unto the banquet that she had prepared but myself …’ (v.12 AV). ‘Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall’ (Prov. 16:18). Of Esther chapter 6, F.B. Huey, Jnr. says, ‘The entire chapter shows how a series of seemingly trivial circumstances fit together to overrule the evil intentions of Haman’ (The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, vol.4, 1988, p.821). The king could not sleep, so he had the royal annals read to him (v.1), and Haman was in the court awaiting (v.4). Here we have no series of undesigned coincidences, no chance. The LXX adds that God took away the king’s sleep [Comment 5]. By God’s intention Mordecai was finally honoured for his good service. The king ordered that faithful Jew to be led in royal garb through the street of the city on horseback. ‘The LORD God of Israel saith … for them that honour me I will honour’ (1 Sam. 2:30). Robert J. Butler From Mount Forest: These chapters record the tables being turned, as divine deliverance overtakes mere human reasoning. Esther puts Mordecai’s plan into effect to counter Haman’s scheme. The king was motivated by appearances (cp. Esth. 1:10-11; 5:1), and we know what happened to Vashti when she had a difference of opinion with this king. Appeasement rather than defiance was Esther’s alternative strategy. She presented herself attractively, then invited the king to what he liked (a banquet: cp. 1:5; 5:4,8) and wine was again a focal point. These evidence earthly wisdom. Did gaining the promise of up to ‘half the kingdom’ indicate the strategy was working? [Comment 6 and cp. Comment 1]. Mordecai seemed more confident. Dispensing with mourning sackcloth, he is found back in the king’s gate where such apparel was forbidden (cp. 4:2; 5:9) [Comment 7]. Was this an evidence of faith in a good outcome, or just a compromise to best learn of developments? Soon he would be led back to the palace, getting a foretaste of the glory Haman coveted, while Haman himself would cover his head in shame (6:11-12) and find his superstitious guides (3:7; 6:13) now predicting doom. These do not really provide guiding principles for us. Christians instead need humility and spiritual discernment for constructive assessment when error needs correction (Prov. 18:13; Mat. 7:1-5; 18:15-35). The role reversal is striking, and a precursor (8:15), but not because Mordecai’s scheme was foolproof. It required an external factor completely beyond his control: the unplanned reminder of Mordecai’s loyalty. Otherwise as Haman
51
anticipated, and while Esther understandably procrastinated, the hanging would have occurred [Comment 8]. But there is no mention of a Nehemiah-like prayer (Neh. 1:4-11) from Mordecai or Esther, though God may indeed have heard a prayer of faith from any of His people (a lesson to us). In this turn of events it is striking that God brought out Mordecai’s loyalty to the king (6:2) as the feature that turned the tables, whereas the whole problem for God’s people proceeded from his mistaken disloyalty (3:2): showing disrespect to someone the king highly favoured (if we are correct that bowing to Haman would not have breached God’s commands). We might be reminded of the higher principle of God’s expectations in Psalm 2:10-12 [Comment 9]. We should attempt consistency when looking for types in Scripture; a bad person or deed is not usually the type for a good antitype. Therefore, perhaps we should not attempt to spiritualize Ahasuerus’ words in 6:6 as a question by the Father to us about how He should glorify the Son, which is anyway a divinely predetermined issue (Col. 1:15-19; Heb. 2:10) [Comment 10]. The important thing to note is the sublime accuracy of Mordecai’s words in 4:14, just as Caiaphas in John 11:49-52 spoke of more than he understood. God would preserve His people, especially the faithful remnant at His house in Jerusalem, now jeopardized by rash actions in faraway Susa. And He does so in an expression of divine wisdom. Geoff Hydon From Podagatlapalli: About five years after Esther had been made queen, Haman having been promoted above all other officials, managed to get a decree to destroy the people of the Jews (Esth. 2:16, 3:7). Mordecai urged Esther to approach the king knowing it could incur death if she went uninvited. Yet rather than see her people hurt she was prepared both to lose her status as queen and even to die. After three days of her own fasting and that of her fellow-Jews in Shushan, she was invited to present her request to the king. It was that Haman should come that day to the banquet she had prepared for him and the king (5:4). Haman was elated to be the only honoured guest; but when he saw Mordecai in the king's gate, and that he did not stand or tremble before him, he was filled with indignation. In His pride Haman related all his successes to his friends and family, but added, ‘This avails me nothing, so long as I see Mordecai the Jew sitting at the king’s gate’ (5:13). They devised a plan to hang Mordecai. Haman builds the gallows even before he gets the king’s approval. He is so confident of his own position. With Mordecai out of the way he could merrily enjoy the banquet (v.14).
52
God always makes a way for His people in a crisis. The God of Israel worked to save His people. He disturbed the king's sleep and the king arose to check the records. ‘What shall be done for the man whom the king delights to honour?’ (6:6). Haman’s pride assumed he was the man. He chose public honour, but was ordered quickly to direct such honour to Mordecai whom he hated. What a warning to this man! As his wife declared, ‘If Mordecai, before whom you have begun to fall, is of Jewish descent, you will not prevail against him but will surely fall before him’ (6:13). Haman’s pride destroyed him (see Prov. 16:18; 18:12). The meek will inherit, and those who humble themselves will be lifted up. God works all things together for good for those who love Him (Rom. 8:28) [cp. Comment 5]. ‘The proud man has a mirror in which he sees himself; the humble man has a window through which he sees others.’ B.V.Prasada Rao
From Southport: Esther showed her courage in approaching the king. She was wise to dress in her finery and not in her fasting clothes. Mordecai could not go further than ‘before the king’s gate’ in sackcloth (Esth. 4:2) [cp. Comment 7]. Ashpenaz was fearful of the king’s wrath should Daniel and his friends appear before the king looking worse than the others due to their diet (Dan. 1:8-15). John the Baptist observed that those who wear soft raiment are in kings’ courts (Luke 7:25). Not having been in the king’s presence for thirty days, Esther was astute enough not to make a request immediately [cp. Comment 1]. We must spend time in prayer each day with God before we can come with a shopping list of prayer points. No good coming after many days of non-contact in prayer with a sudden demand. Esther was not going to make her plea in public, hence the invitation to a private meal. Another parallel for us to note: ‘pray to thy Father which is in secret’ (Mat. 6:6 AV). Esther’s God-given strategy coincided with a restless night for Ahasuerus. Was his lack of sleep stirred by a conscience that he had forgotten to do something or reward someone? Only God knows. Pressure of work is a major cause of insomnia in the western world today. The court records were read to the king and the final parts of God’s plan to rescue the Jewish people started to fall into place.
53
Haman’s life was consumed with a mad hatred of Mordecai and all the Jews, which clouded his judgement. He was so full of his self-importance that he could think of no one else the king might wish to honour. He unwittingly raised Mordecai from sackcloth to royal robes; from walking to riding on the king’s own horse; and in so doing elevated Mordecai above himself. The Jews may have been scattered from their land but they were still the ‘peculiar treasure’ belonging to the Lord (Ex.19.5) and would be again in the future—so they could not be wiped out (Mal. 3:17). These were the people of whom Balaam said ‘I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh’ (Num. 24:17). From this nation was to come the promised Messiah. Haman’s plans could not be fulfilled when they contradicted the divine plan, nor could the pogroms of Russia or the Holocaust of the Nazi regime wipe out the Jews. Haman’s wife and friends seem more aware of the privileged position of the Jews than does Haman himself. He had left it too late to repent. The death sentence against the Jews had been issued; the matter could not be undone or covered up now. He had nowhere to hide. Steve Henderson From Surulere: Ringing true to life? There are fewer sights more perplexing to the godly or spiritually mature than the unravelling of the plans of the wicked upon their own heads. Although, ‘When the righteous prosper, the city rejoices; when the wicked perish, there are shouts of joy’ (Prov. 11:10 NIV), the resounding joyful shouts do not necessarily come from the lips of the righteous. It is a key divine injunction to all not to ‘... gloat when your enemy falls; when they stumble, do not let your heart rejoice’ (Prov. 24:17). In the story of Haman an inglorious picture of the life of the wicked is unveiled for profound reflection, from the upscaling of his plot for the grand humiliation of Mordecai and extermination of the Jewish race, to his pitiable immodesty in deeming himself the man whom the king delighted to honour (Esth. 6:6); from the fawning loyalty of his presumed ‘wise men’ to the wanton lust for power of his wife. . ‘The sins of some men are obvious, reaching the place of judgment ahead of them ...’ (1 Tim. 5:24). Haman was in this category of men. Haman’s downfall was one of those instances when the Lord Almighty intervenes in the affairs of men, nations and kingdoms to display His sovereignty and frustrate the counsel of the wicked. ‘He thwarts the plans of the crafty, so that their hands
54
achieve no success’ (Job 5:12). Of old, ‘for their sake He rebuked kings: “Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm”’ (Ps. 105:14-15). Frederick F. Ntido From Warri: Haman’s wife advises What looked like an ideal circumstance for Haman to deal publicly with Mordecai and to make it serve as a deterrent to others (Esth. 5:14) had now been miraculously altered. This was very significant in the disastrous turn of events (6:10-11) which could not be ignored by Haman’s wife and the other advisors. We take it that they may have been aware of the history of the Jews and the Amalekites, and of how God had protected the Jews in dealing with their enemies in the past [this seems more than likely—Eds.]. They perhaps recognised that the Lord’s judgement was at hand for Haman (cp. Comment 3). Ringing true to life; reward for labour Mordecai saved the king by exposing the plot against him. Although it took a while before he was rewarded, it reminded us of 1 Corinthians 15:58. Whatever is done for the Lord will not go unrewarded by Him either in this life or hereafter at the judgement seat of Christ. Corporate prayer The importance of group prayers is emphasized in the book of Esther. She requested prayer support as she embarked on a delicate and necessary task. The apostle Paul sought the prayers of the whole church in his labour for the Lord (2 Thes. 3:1). Abuse of power Haman’s ascension to prominence was rapid, but there is no history of what he did to merit it. This could be regarded as God’s permissive will (John 13:7). We can comfortably rest on the fact that promotion comes from the Lord, and as such the position that the Lord allows should be used to honour Him by being a blessing to the people we come across rather than being boastful (5:1112). God humbles those who abuse the position that is given to them. Richard Owotorufa
COMMENTS 1. (Aberkenfig and others): Esther the Queen If leaving vengeance to God is Esther’s reason for not denouncing Haman at the first banquet, we must ask why she does so at the second one. Vengeance seems a more probable motive in her action against Haman’s sons (9:13), though her stature of character that we see emerging here suggests by 9:13 a well weighed decision to make sure further
55
attacks on Jews would not arise from an embittered family, and perhaps to deal with Agagites. The plot against Mordecai (revealed not by her but by a eunuch—7:9) does not change the issue raised here—why she holds back her main request at the first banquet. We might find a reason in reaction to the tension of risking life by entering the court. But the Esther who copes with the hazards of the harem, and who plans the three-day fast, is stronger than to need a day’s respite. Rather, there is a remarkably apposite strategy that shows her understanding of her husband and the language of his court. She made her first request attractive to such a man, and an easy one to grant. Then as he realised this queen must have a greater request, she prepares the steps that will commit him: “If I have found favour in the sight of the king ...” (she already had, but is testing his reaction throughout); “and if it pleases the king ...” (words he likes to hear); “to grant my petition and do what I request ...”—she has now repeated his own words twice, but firmed them into what he will be expected to do. Then—the tantalising proposal of just a second banquet; and a promise to be respectfully obedient—‘tomorrow’. She knows the power of leaving the king to puzzle over her real motive; and perhaps she wished to give the indisciplined Haman a chance to overreach himself. (It is a pure wisdom to let a corrupted person show his true nature to a man whose eyes need to be opened.) To this we add the facets noted by Mt Forest and Southport. 2. (Cromer): If Mordecai was centred on God and His purposes for His people, why is there no mention at all of Him, or His law? Was it impossible for the author to mention the reverence Jews would be understood by Persians to have for their God? See also January issue, p.10, Comment 7; February, p. 25, Comment 1; and ‘The Message of Esther’, para. 2, (in this issue’s Mail-box) on Mordecai. In March, p.41, Comment 1, J.T.N. notes that Mordecai showed no scruples about accepting honour to himself (6:11); as is also implied when later he became second only to King Ahasuerus (10:3) M.A. 3. (Cromer and others): It would seem to me that it was only when Haman came crawling back to his home in abject humiliation, that his wife and close companions realised the fact that Mordecai was more influential in the king’s court than they had reckoned, having the freedom of the palace before this recent elevation (Esth. 2:11, 19, 21), and now that he was feted he had the power to exact terrible revenge on Haman, and his descendants. R.B.F.
56
4. (Derby): Persian control over far-off Israel was hardly secure or immediate, since Rehum the commander offered to help the re-building decreed by Cyrus but in fact worked against it (Ezra 4:1-8); and later Sanballat of Samaria and Tobiah ‘the Ammonite official’ (NASU), both recognised by Persia, attacked the re-builders despite knowing of the King’s letters (Neh. 2:9-10). There was dislike of Jews because they kept to themselves socially and refused to adapt to some imperial expectations, e.g. military service because they would not march on sabbaths, and the Jewish communities did see the edict as a real threat (Esth. 4:3); but to assume it would cause annihilation is going farther than we know. It was almost a year from Haman’s lot-casting to the date of execution. Daniel and Nehemiah are examples of how Jews became too useful to dispense with and too difficult to coerce. Josephus quotes Strabo: ‘This people has already made its way into every city, and ... has made its power felt’ (Ant. Jud. 14,115). 5. (Halifax ): Chance and God’s intervention ‘... time and chance happen to them all’ (Eccl. 9:1 ESV). This may be written from the perspective that man on earth sees, but the Lord Himself was surely not confining Himself to that view when He said, “Now by chance a priest was going down that road ...” (Luke 10:13). Chance includes opportunity (Acts 27:12; Heb. 12:17), and the countless interconnections of what individuals do (whether they so choose or not), suggest that God does not need to arrange all the connections in order to enact His will. We should be careful about assuming divine arrangements in all that goes before an outcome that is clearly according to God’s will; while we also claim that God more often allows man to choose to act for good or for evil. Podagatla friends cite Romans 8:28, which is certainly borne out by the story as a whole, and the disturbing of the king’s sleep is near to God’s communication of His mind through dreams. But ‘all things work together for good’, does not mean that God arranges all things together for good. At times He allows dire trouble to afflict His own, just as he allows men and women to do awful things. This I understand is how Peter sees the verse in his last paragraph on page 60. See also close of Comment 8. The LXX in 6:1,’God took away his sleep,’ as in several ancient versions except the Vulgate, is most likely to be an effort to make the book more orthodox. M.A. 6. (Mount Forest): The largesse of this autocratic monarch reminds us of a later despotic ruler who, under the influence of alcohol, was foolish enough to offer virtually unlimited power to a young lady who was well aware of her seductive charms, and he was soon to regret his far-too-generous offer when she, at the
57
callous and cruel behest of her mother, demanded right away the decapitation of a great servant of God (Mark 6:21-28). It would seem that the king here had little doubt of Esther’s integrity, and may well have assumed that acceptance of such an offer as he made would not be put on the table by one who, unlike Vashti, was very deferential to him. 7. (Mount Forest): Can we be certain that Mordecai changed from the clothes of mourning back to normal apparel, taking into account chapter 4 verse 4, even though he was back in his place at the king’s gate (5:9; 6:10)? R.B.F. 8. (Mount Forest and others): It is at this point that we may see Mordecai showing wisdom. To urge Esther to intercede for her people is by itself hardly a scheme, and we would expect her, from what we have seen in chapters 2-3, to long to do so without prompting; it is the prospect of failing to get a hearing and losing her life fruitlessly that is holding her back. But Mordecai implies in 4:13 that her race will be revealed by another if she does not do so herself. It may be he who saw that a desperate Jew or an observant official would betray her, though Esther could herself have seen that likelihood. He treats it as a certainty, and we credit it to his experience. Unspoken by either is the fact that Esther’s appeal for the Jews would be greatly strengthened, if Xerxes showed that he still had affection for her. We agree, however, that the Most High, who rules the kingdom of men (Dan. 4:25), is seen here turning the heart of the king wherever He wills (Prov. 21:1). M.A. 9. (Mount Forest): What we don’t know is the reason for Mordecai’s refusal to bow before Haman and pay homage to him, despite the fact that it was a royal decree (cp. 3:2). He perhaps knew more than we think of Haman’s character and background, in fact it would seem more than likely he would make it his aim to discover as much as he could about this person, especially as a result of his apparently swift promotion in the kingdom. Moreover, as soon as he is introduced to us in the divine record, Haman’s lineage as an Agagite is stated (3:1) and mentioned four times thereafter (3:10; 8:3,5; 9:24). On the strong assumption that he was a descendant of the Amalekites, and they were the first nation to ruthlessly attack the Israelites (Num. 24:20) and become a constant thorn in the flesh to God’s people, and also bearing in mind the Lord pledging to be opposed to them from generation to generation (Ex. 17:8,16; cp. Deut. 25:19), is it of little wonder that Mordecai adopted such an attitude towards one of their race who himself may
58
have been well aware of his people’s historical antipathy and subservience to them? Here was a chance of redress. Anti-semitism never goes away in this world. 10. (Mount Forest): While the point is taken about the danger of describing certain people as types of the Saviour, notably where we see in their lives what we might regard as unsavoury aspects of character and conduct, and also being aware of the precariousness of spiritualising comments by people that might appear appealing and relevant in another scriptural context, surely Mordecai’s readiness and fearlessness to come to the defence of his nation in the face of annihilation, would be an appropriate illustration of Christ’s work. Similarly, Ahasuerus’ words in 6:6 could suitably apply to the deserving exaltation of our great Redeemer. R.B.F.
From the Mail-box THE MESSAGE OF ESTHER – A THESIS The historical background The king called ‘Ahasuerus’ in the book of Esther was probably Xerxes (king 486-465 B.C.); this compares with the date of 538 for the beginning of the return of the Jews from Babylon. They were therefore well established in the Land, but the book of Esther contains no reference to this, neither is there any criticism of the Jews who remained in Susa, the capital of the Persian empire. The queen called Vashti in Esther must be Amestris, a licentious and notoriously cruel woman. (The transliterations in various languages yield similar results).
briefly examine the characters. Ahasuerus was a despot who held the power of life or death over his subjects, and did not scruple to use it. He was quickly angered, and acted in the heat of his anger. Vashti was strong-willed, and not afraid to deny the king. Esther, on the other hand, was initially young and naïve, and obeyed her cousin Mordecai's instructions to go to the king's harem apparently without question. We must remember that in those days women were generally regarded as possessions. She may have seen the chance to be queen as one not to be turned down, even though the procedure might be rather distasteful. Mordecai's position was rather more equivocal; he 'sat at the king's gate', a
The protagonists Without retelling the story we can
59
position of status, but he saw no wrong in delivering Esther up, although he enquired daily after her. Haman is pr esented as a self-promoting, acquisitive man, who would not scruple to destroy a whole people because he had been offended. Esther described him as ‘This wicked Haman’, and it was true.
or His Word? We have reviewed the characters in it and have found that most were flawed, some deeply so. My thesis is that its prime purpose is to display the providence of God. An event not yet mentioned in the Bible Studies magazine* records when the king ‘happened’ not to be able to sleep, and ‘happened’ to have read to him the book of court chronicles, where he ‘happened’ to come upon what Mordecai had done. All through the book of Esther the actions of men who were not consciously doing the will of God were working together to do it involuntarily. In this case God saved His people through this means; its lesson for us is that we can have confidence in His providence towards us. ‘For we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose’ (Rom. 8:28). Peter Hickling , Cromer
Esther's bravery A high point of the narrative is Esther's willingness to imperil herself before the notoriously fickle king. Mordecai urged her by messenger to try to use her influence with him, saying ‘Do not think to yourself that in the king's palace you will escape any more than all the other Jews. For if you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father's house will perish. And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?’ (4:13-14 ESV). Mordecai evidently had faith in the providence of God. Esther responded with philosophical resignation, ‘I will go to the king, though it is against the law, and if I perish, I perish’ (v.16). As readers will see, she was successful, and the Jewish nation in the Persian empire was saved.
*The article was written before March issue was published. We can now note these mentions: Halifax, para. 2 (with Comment 5); Podagatla, para. 4 and Southport, para. 3.—Eds. NOTES FROM EDITORS We welcome this brief summary of an important understanding of the purpose of the Book, from an esteemed former editor of the magazine.
The purpose of the book Why is there included in the canon of Holy Scripture a book which does not mention God's name or His holy city
60
One difficulty, however, invites further discussion. It is not clear to me how the total absence of mention of God, of Jerusalem, and of the Law, helps the reader to expect a message about the unseen working of God, if that message is the chief one intended. The conventions of historical narrative are handled with outstanding craftsmanship by this author. It soon becomes clear that the book is designed to make a religious and moral statement. Why then would Jews who have a sense of destiny for their nation, shining from the appeal to Esther to risk her life for them all, say nothing of the God whom they serve, and who had protected so many generations from the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? This points to the further theme of departure—from the purity of the Law, from occasions of worship and consecration, and from the call of the prophets and psalm-writers to love Zion. Thus the book shows what happens to God’s people when they neglect these things.
deeply about the welfare of the Jews, and might be ensuring that his revival tractate would not suffer censorship. M.A. I would agree that the main thrust of this invaluable part of the divine record, despite the absence of God’s name, word, and service, is to reveal the behind-the-scenes working of His hand which is always seen to be in overall control of world events ‘... who works all things according to the counsel of His will’ (Eph. 1:11 NKJV; cp. Dan. 4:17). Another matter that might influence our perception of the Jewish characters and events in this book is a mistaken impression of time/date factors, the statement sometimes being made that Mordecai and Esther should have returned to Jerusalem with the exiles. This is most improbable as the first return under Zerubbabel took place in 537-535 B.C. (Ezra 2; Neh. 7). Since the book of Esther covers the period 486 – 473 B.C., 50 or so years after, it is more than likely Mordecai would either be unborn or a young child at that time. Interestingly though, a Mordecai is mentioned in Ezra 2:2 and Nehemiah 7:7 as being part of the returning company under Zerubbabel; the conjecture arising from this being that he returned from Jerusalem back to Babylon by royal request to assist the bur geoning em pir e I n t he administration of his people. R.B.F.
Yet this takes us only some way to an answer. The complete suppression of those features that are a loved part of the books of Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah is still a puzzle. Perhaps the reason is that a history that climaxes in triumph for the Jews against enemies across the empire was a highly charged political document. The author clearly cared
61
Certainly it is true that the unseen working of God is apparent throughout the story of Esther, to bring about salvation for the Jewish nation. The threat to the Jews was a threat to the remnant, for their exercise in Jerusalem was put at grave risk by Haman's desire for revenge. It is tempting to think that God's working of salvation was somehow a reflection on the character of Mordecai. For just as we see the strength and zeal of Zerubbabel, Ezra and Nehemiah in the land, and of Daniel and his friends in captivity, so we strive to see the same in Mordecai and Esther. But is not the purpose of the book to set a contrast against the accounts of those who were faithful, and so to learn that when God sets out to achieve His will, He may do so in spite of those involved, not because of them? February's issue,
Comment 1 provides a fuller assessment of Mordecai's character. To build on the point made by R.B.F. above, it was only the ancestors of Mordecai who had the chance to return to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel (the Mordecai of Ezra 2:2 and Neh. 7:7 being another man of the same name— see February, Comment 9). Yet Ezra and Nehemiah were later moved to find a way, one from Babylon and the other from Susa (Ezra 7; Neh. 1-2), and many in their understanding of the book of Esther have seen importance in the dates in which the story occurred. A. T. Doodson's article 'The Feast of Pur' (Bible Studies, 1963, p.177; http://www.hayespress.org/biblehelp s-1963-179) provides very helpful insight. J.T.N.
62